The Next President?

clivex said:
My concern with Obama would be that he would freeze when faced with big decisions.
Click to expand...

My concern with McCain is that he would make important decisions impulsively without thinking them through properly.

I've been tuned out to a large extent since i was shifted off the US campaign beat (after Hillary dropped out), but what do you make of the Midwest, Gareth? I'm thinking states like Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin could all be leaning Obama, though he will need them. Colorado seems firmly in play this year as well.
 
He's screwed without Minnesota. They've been Dem since Nixon won his landslide - if he can't win there he might as well give up now. Similar story with Wisconsin (Dem since Reagan's second win). This should be Obama's patch - it's slightly worrying that there's still any doubt, to be honest. Iowa seem to love him since the Caucus.

Pretty sure I had Colorado in McCain's column - I'll post what I came up with the other night when I'm back home!
 
A bit more detail...

The first assumption is that Obama wins every State that has voted Dem in each of the last 4 elections. These are California, New York, Illnois, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Jersey, Massachussets, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Maryland, Oregon, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, Delaware and Washington DC.

The polls I've seen have him ahead in these states. They're basically the States that Kerry won, minus New Hampshire. It would give him 248 of the 270 electoral votes he needs.

On the other side, the Republican bankers should be Texas, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, Alabama, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Kansas, Mississippi, Utah, Nebraska, Idaho, Alaska, Wyoming, North Dakota and South Dakota.

Some of these are a lot closer in the polling than Obama's bankers, but the assumption is that they'll come through for McCain. They represent 135 electoral votes.

Of the remaining States, I expect McCain to win Montana, Arizona, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennesee, Kentucky, West Virginia and Georgia. This represents another 78 electoral votes, bringing him up to 213 of the 270 required.

So at this point Obama needs 22 electoral votes and McCain needs 57 and we're left with 7 States and 77 votes in play:

Florida (27)
Ohio (20)
Colorado (9)
Iowa (7)
Nevada (5)
New Mexico (5)
Hew Hampshire (4)

So the scenarios are as follows:

a) Obama takes Florida, wins the election.

b) Obama takes Ohio. Needs any other state (extremely likely) to win the election.

c) McCain wins Florida and Ohio (47 votes). This brings him up to 260 votes, just 10 from victory. Obama still needs 22. The following States are in play:

Colorado (9)
Iowa (7)
Nevada (5)
New Mexico (5)
New Hampshire (4)

In this scenario, Obama would need to take 4 of the 5 States to win. The good news for him is that some polls have him leading in all 5. But I think it's rather optimistic and that McCain will find the 10 he needs from some combination of Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and possibly even New Hampshire.

The scary possibility is:

Obama takes Colorado + Iowa + one of Nevada or New Mexico

or

Obama takes Iowa + Nevada + New Mexico + New Hampshire

both of which leaves a 269 vs 269 tie...
 
Some interesting stuff out from Rasmussen:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...sen_polling/fox_rasmussen_swing_state_polling

Survey was done on Saturday, so plenty of time for the McCain convention bounce to kick in.

Basically, McCain is beating the margin of error in Ohio, but Florida is a complete tie.

Perhaps most interesting for Obama is a 3pt lead in Colorado. That's probably the Dem's Denver convention bounce, and it's still within the margin of error, but remember that if Obama can repeat Kerry's result and add Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado, he wins without needing Ohio and Florida...
 
Betfair has it:

Obama 1.71
McCain 2.38

I think it's closer than that, so the value is with McCain at the moment.
 
Gallup has him 5pts ahead (49 v 44) but that's expected to contract as we move away from the conventions. Same poll had Obama at 50% this time last week (i.e. before the big Republican convention speeches).

Rasmussen has it 48 v 47 to McCain, well within the margin of error, in a poll completed entirely post-conventions.

Zogby hasn't released anything yet this week.
 
Cheers, Gareth.

I agree with pretty much all of your calculations (with the exception of Virginia, which is very much a wing state IMO).

I would think that Obama faces an uphill battle in both Ohio and Flordia given the state demographics. At the same time I'm not so sure McCain isn't vulnerable in a few of his "holds" at the minute (specifically Indiana and Missouri- although the demographics in both states are in his favour).

Obama also has a lot fo money ready to be pumped into his darkhorse states (North carolina and Georgia). Will be interesting to see what effect it has.

The more this becomes about strategy on a local level, advantage Obama.
 
Can team Clinton be sent to Ohio? Big potential blue collar vote there though I'm not so sure that Obama can reach this block to the same extent that Hilary could. Florida will depend on the urban populations versus the pan-handle, with the ageing demographic it should favour the Republicans. There's also the issue of Cuba never far away which will afvour the hawkish McCain over the more conciliatory Obama. New Mexico I'm not completely convinced will go Republican, as the latino vote might be more Obama inclined and its a demographic that's getting all the more important there (as indeed it is generally)

In fact, the more you look at where the swing states are, the more you realise that Clinton is the candidate that was more likely to win for the Dems
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
In fact, the more you look at where the swing states are, the more you realise that Clinton is the candidate that was more likely to win for the Dems
Click to expand...

I think we've realized that for a while, Warbler! She would undoubtedly play better in Ohio, Florida, Indiana/Missouri.
 
New Mexico I'm not completely convinced will go Republican, as the latino vote might be more Obama inclined
Click to expand...

Unfortunately on the grounds of race, I thought the opposite was the truth?
 
I'm sure I'm right in saying that at the last election it was notable how many latino's were becoming increasingly upwardly mobile and more prepared to vote Republican than they'd historically been. I'm not sure how affluent they are in New Mexico but one suspects it could be among the sunrise states
 
eeek!

The Times:
"As a believer in Creationism and the Rapture, McCain's running mate ...."

If you're not aware of what 'the Rapture' refers to, be afraid anyway!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapture

:eek:

Generally speaking, it's (Rapture-believing) not that scary; when it comes to US believers, though, it takes on a new power to make one pause for thought ...

She could be that 'heartbeat' away from delivering the Rapture herself ....

(don't even go there, Bar!)

Regards
 
I can`t believe this is even close. If the Americans elect McCain it`ll be the biggest fuck up since they went with Nixon again in `72.
 
Gareth Flynn said:
Of course, he did nothing of the sort...
Click to expand...

That's what I thought; then I saw the clip.

Given Palin's much quoted "Lipstick" line, the association was unavoidable & immediate.
It seemed to me his audience made the same association: he was nearly directly alluding to Palin as a 'pig'.

Whilst there was a certain indirectness in his words, I got the impression the indirectness was estimated to be just enough of a smoke screen to try to get away with it -- didn't work, of course.

Too late now for excuses for this speech -- it can't be buried, either.

He's too green in judgement and he's blown it.


Regards
 
So Sarah Palin now has 100% international rights on the word 'lipstick'.

People hear what they want to hear.

While he said he had not studied Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton's plan, he said it was "eerily reminiscent" of the failed plan she offered as first lady in the 1990s.

"I think they put some lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig," he said of her proposal.
Click to expand...

Guess who?
 
I know that GF. Its the impression, however, that counts and the Reps will ensure that it is hammered home, especially by talk radio mouthpieces.
 
Gareth Flynn said:
So Sarah Palin now has 100% international rights on the word 'lipstick'.

People hear what they want to hear.
Quote:
While he said he had not studied Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton's plan, he said it was "eerily reminiscent" of the failed plan she offered as first lady in the 1990s.

"I think they put some lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig," he said of her proposal.


Guess who?
Click to expand...

Kind of off the mark, there.

"Lipstick rights" is hardly a relevant comment.

People don't entirely hear what they want to hear -- just trotting out that old thought doesn't change the speech and it's allusion by association.

Lest it escaped notice, Palin was alluding to herself when mentioning Lipstick -- don't think Clinton had even mentioned it, had she?

Similar but unrelated quotes don't wash as reasoning, really.

Regards
 
The reason it is bad is nothing to do with the comment itself; any voter who is still up for grabs is likely to see through the GOP's faux outrage for what it is.

The reason it's bad is because it keeps the Phantom Palin front and center, and Obama needs to drag McCain back into the ring.
 
I agree the point about the faux outrage -- predictable stuff.
Poor judgement there, too, I thought: they should have underplayed their response, or at least avoided 'outrage'. On reflection, of course they're old hands at what they do, so maybe the 'outrage' will play better over there.

Personally, I couldn't prefer one camp over another.
I've an idea the Republicans will win and, frankly, I can't see the Democrats being any better or worse.

Regards
 
Back
Top